BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

338 results for “disallowance”+ Penaltyclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,264Delhi4,366Ahmedabad1,372Chennai1,007Bangalore1,006Kolkata994Jaipur771Pune766Hyderabad533Indore462Chandigarh352Surat338Cochin189Raipur180Rajkot161Cuttack135Agra124Lucknow122Nagpur118Amritsar99Visakhapatnam91Karnataka67Guwahati64Allahabad55Ranchi52SC47Calcutta43Telangana35Dehradun34Jodhpur32Varanasi31Jabalpur29Panaji25Patna24Kerala6Punjab & Haryana5Rajasthan3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Himachal Pradesh1Gauhati1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Orissa1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)85Addition to Income82Section 143(3)72Penalty59Disallowance51Section 80I47Deduction46Section 254(1)27Section 26326Section 68

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), SURAT vs. J K PAPER LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 181/SRT/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) D.C.I.T. M/S J.K. Paper Ltd. Circle-1(1)(2), P.O. Central Pulp Mill, Vs. Surat. Fort Songadh, Surat. Pan : Aaact 6305 N Appellant Respondednt

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 145ASection 254(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 292BSection 40aSection 80I

penalty on this issue/ disallowance. ITA 181/SRT/2020 DCIT Vs J K Paper Ltd. 14. With regard to disallowance made on account

Showing 1–20 of 338 · Page 1 of 17

...
24
Section 3721
Section 14819

BAYER VAPI PVT. LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BILAG INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD.,),VAPI vs. THE A CIT., VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1688/AHD/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.1688/Ahd/2014 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2005-06 Bayer Vapi Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Bilag Industries Income Tax, Private Limited), Plot No.306/3, Vapi Circle, Vapi. Phase-Ii, Vapi – 396 195, Gujarat. [Pan: Aabcb 2100 L] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Mehul K Patel, Advocate & Shri A. Gopalakrishnan, Ca Shri Prasenjit Singh – Cit(Dr) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By 18.07.2019 सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On: 27.08.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per O.P.Meena, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The 1. Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)- Valsad, Valsad(In Short “The Cit(A)”) Dated 31.03.2014 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2005-06. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita 2. No.1688/Ahd/2014 Read As Under : “01. The Appellant Company Has Neither Concealed Its Income Nor Submitted Any Inaccurate Particulars Of Income & The Adjustments/ Additions Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Contrary To The Facts Of The Case & Law & Deserves To Be Deleted. 02. On Appreciation Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Bayer Vapi Pvt. Ltd.,(Formerly Known As Bilag Industries Pvt. Ltd., Vs.Acit-Vapi/Ita No.1688/Ahd/2014: A.Y.2005-06 Page 2 Of 20

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

penalty levied on these disallowance is deleted. With regard to penalty in respect of reallocation of 23. interest expenses amounting

SANTOSH SINGH HUKAM SINGH KARNAWAT,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(8), SURAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 655/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

penalty on these disallowances. Even the Ld. CIT(A) too has confirmed the levy of penalty on the aforesaid Santosh

R.S. TRADELINK PVT.LTD.,SURAT vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-4,, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1289/AHD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Jul 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No’S.1288 & 1289/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2006-07 R.S.Tradelinks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of C/O.Bombay Way Bridge, Magdalla Income Tax, Port Road, Magdalla, Surat. Circle-4, Surat. [Pan: Aabcr 6607 A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri R.P.Rastogi – Sr.Dr

Section 144

penalty levied may please be deleted. The Retuned Income of Rs.9,48,744/- was assessed 20. u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144 of the Act by making addition of Rs.1,76,44,312/- being 50% disallowance

SHRI VIJAY CHAMPAK PATEL,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(4), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 281/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.281/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Vijay Champak Patel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Pachhlu Faliyu, Near Water Ward-6(4), Surat Tank, Bharthana, Vesu, Surat

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah - CAFor Respondent: Shri O P Meena – Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 54ESection 54F

penalty is levieable on this disallowance. So far as disallowance at Serial No. 3 is concerned the Tribunal in para

SHREE SAINATH SARVAJANIK SEWA MANDAL TRUST,UNA vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 204/SRT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.204/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17) (Physical Court Hearing) Shree Sainath Sarvajanik Sewa Vs. The Ito, Exemption Ward, Mandal Trust, Surat. N.H. No.8, Near Ganesh Sisodra, Unn-396445, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafts7802P (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Revenue By: Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 12/05/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/07/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2016-17, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] National Faceless Appeal Centre (In Short ‘Nfac), Delhi, In Appeal No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2021-22/1036051308(1) Dated 30.09.2021, Which In Turn Arises Out Of A Penalty Order Passed By Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. DR
Section 11(6)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

disallowing the exemption, penalty cannot be imposed. The penalty levied stands set aside.' The situation in the present case is still

SAHAJANAND MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED ,SURAT vs. SURAT, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 998/SRT/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 998/Srt/2024 (Ay 2006-07) (Physical Court Hearing) Sahajanand Medical Technologies Deputy Commissioner Of Income- Ltd. Nr. Dabholi Char Rasta, Tax, Circle-2(1)(2), Surat, Room बनाम Ved Road, No.602, 6Th Floor, Vs Surat-395 004 Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, [Pan : Aafcs 7694 L] Surat-395001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

penalty on both disallowances on issuing shown cause notice to the assessee before levying penalty. The Assessing Officer noted that

M/S. GUJARAT CHEMICAL PORT TERMINAL COMPANY LTD.,,BHARUCH vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, appeal for A

ITA 2660/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meena

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin J.Marfatia – CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Smitha V.Nair – Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)

penalty of Rs.38,95,000/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on following additions :- (i) Disallowance of repairs

M/S. GUJARAT CHEMICAL PORT TERMINAL COMPANY LTD.,,BHARUCH vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, appeal for A

ITA 2659/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meena

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin J.Marfatia – CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Smitha V.Nair – Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)

penalty of Rs.38,95,000/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on following additions :- (i) Disallowance of repairs

M/S. GUJARAT CHEMICAL PORT TERMINAL COMPANY LTD.,,BHARUCH vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, appeal for A

ITA 2658/AHD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meena

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin J.Marfatia – CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Smitha V.Nair – Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)

penalty of Rs.38,95,000/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on following additions :- (i) Disallowance of repairs

MUKESHBHAI DUNGARBHAI DALIYA,SURAT vs. DY.CIT CIRCLE-2,, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 10/SRT/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon'Ble & Shri O.P.Meena, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No’S.10 & 11/Srt/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2010-11 Mukeshbhai Dungarbhai Daliya, V Dcit, Circle-2, Surat. 4, Mamta Park Society, Varachha S Road, Surat. . [Pan: Avfpp 7380 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Sameer Shah – Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.Dr

Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

penalty, inspite of, assessment order as passed by the learned AO being non speaking order with regard to disallowance of expenses

MUKESHBHAI DUNGARBHAI DALIYA,SURAT vs. DY.CIT CIRCLE-2,, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 11/SRT/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon'Ble & Shri O.P.Meena, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No’S.10 & 11/Srt/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2010-11 Mukeshbhai Dungarbhai Daliya, V Dcit, Circle-2, Surat. 4, Mamta Park Society, Varachha S Road, Surat. . [Pan: Avfpp 7380 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Sameer Shah – Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.Dr

Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

penalty, inspite of, assessment order as passed by the learned AO being non speaking order with regard to disallowance of expenses

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-9,, SURAT vs. M/S. I.P. PATEL, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 414/AHD/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Aug 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 108Section 145(3)Section 148Section 69C

penalty were debited by assessee in its books of account and claimed as deduction. Assessing Officer in the show cause notice only proposed the addition for disallowing

M/S. I.P. PATEL & CO.,,SURAT vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-9,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 37/AHD/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Aug 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 108Section 145(3)Section 148Section 69C

penalty were debited by assessee in its books of account and claimed as deduction. Assessing Officer in the show cause notice only proposed the addition for disallowing

SATHAIYA GANAPATHY,PUDUKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD 1, BARDOLI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 329/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.329 & 330/Srt/2025 Assessment Years: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Sathaiya Ganapathy, Vs. Ito, Ts No.4114, South 3 Rd Street, Ward – 1, Pukukottai, Tamil Nadu - 622001 Bardoli "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahbpg2414Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mayank A. Ogriwala, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

Section 111ASection 16Section 24Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on the disallowance of deductions & addition on STCG on sale of shares, without appreciating that

SATHAIYA GANAPATHY,PUDUKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD 1 , BARDOLI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 330/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.329 & 330/Srt/2025 Assessment Years: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Sathaiya Ganapathy, Vs. Ito, Ts No.4114, South 3 Rd Street, Ward – 1, Pukukottai, Tamil Nadu - 622001 Bardoli "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahbpg2414Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mayank A. Ogriwala, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

Section 111ASection 16Section 24Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on the disallowance of deductions & addition on STCG on sale of shares, without appreciating that

RAJVI CORPORATION,SURAT vs. DCIT, CIRLCE-3(2), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on ground No

ITA 12/SRT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 12/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) M/S. Rajvi Corporation, Vs. The Dcit, Circle-3(2)(2), D-3, Om Final Plot No. 108, Bombay Surat. Food Compound Kasanagar Road, Nr. Idbi Bank Katargam, Surat-395004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaofr0631E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ronak Parekh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Deependra Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Surat [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A),-3/10473/2016-17 Dated 19.07.2019, Which In Turn Arises Out Of Penalty Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Parekh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deependra Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

disallowance and in penalty proceedings the assessing officer has levied the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act on ad hoc disallowances

THE PURSHOTTAM FARMERS CO.OP COTTON GINNING & PRESSING SOCIETY LTD.,SURAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(3), SURAT

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 501/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) The Purshottam Farmers Co. Op D.C.I.T., Cotton Ginning & Pressing Society Circle-2(3), Surat, Vs. Ltd., Aayakar Bhawan, Jahangirpura Gin, Jahangirpura, Majuragate, Surat, Rander, Surat, Gujarat-395009 Gujarat-395001. Pan No. Aaaat 3000 A Appellant/ Respondent Respondent/ Assessee

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 3Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowance in every case would not ipso facto lead to levy of penalty. The Assessing officer levied penalty @ 100% of tax sought

M/S. PANCHSHEEL INTERMEDIATES,,SURAT vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 133/SRT/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Mar 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) M/S Panchsheel Intermediates Deputy Commissioner Of Plot No. 8101, Income Tax, Circle-2(3) Vs. Industrial Estate, Surat Sachin, Surat Pan : Aadfp1002C Appellant Respondednt

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

penalty the assessee submitted that mere the disallowance of expenses would not lead levy of penalty. The Assessing Officer was not justified

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, SURAT vs. M/S AALIDHAR TEXTOOL ENGINEERS PVT. LTD., SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 226/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 133(6)Section 14ASection 254(1)Section 80G

disallowance was made to avoid penalty. The Assessing Officer worked out the disallowance of Rs.2.70 crore under section 14A by invoking